Jump to content
vend3tta

LD Topic-Jan/Feb13

Recommended Posts

This topic is really util based. I feel like I won't even have to read a framework as a neg, just a bunch of disads.


I think if anything the aff is going to have trouble doing something creative enough to avoid all the turns the NC will read, answering 7 minutes of blocks with a 4 minute speech won't be very much fun. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This topic is really util based. I feel like I won't even have to read a framework as a neg, just a bunch of disads.

 

 

I think if anything the aff is going to have trouble doing something creative enough to avoid all the turns the NC will read, answering 7 minutes of blocks with a 4 minute speech won't be very much fun. 

There are tons of creative ways to affirm that aren't util.  I'm probably reading a Kant aff along with some critical stuff.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Molten Aff cases will rain from the heavens as clouds of T cover the "debate-o-sphere," bringing doom, destruction, and terribly annoying shells.

Spec your "developing countries"

Spec your "environmental protection" policy

Spec your "resource extraction" techniques

I'm sorry? What's substance? The order will be 3 Off.

  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

what's good neg ground?

Ks, DAs (you can def find stuff about how we need resource extraction in developing countries), CPs (tons of ground with these too), there is other stuff too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This topic is really good, I think there's pretty great ground on both sides. Then again, I might just gasping for air after the last two freaking topics this year. Ecofem K AFF, Climate Change NC. Those would be my stock arguments, but I was also thinking about looking at the process of development for developing countries and arguing societal progress.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"When in conflict" makes the negative side of the topic more viable than it otherwise might be. I think that negative teams would benefit if they argued that environmental protection and resource extraction are often not in conflict. Protecting the environment generally allows us to extract its resources over time and to extract more resources in the long run than we would in the short term. Debate's most common impacts such as warming or biodiversity collapse are scenarios in which resource extraction and environmental protection are obviously not at odds since those impacts would certainly curtail resource extraction, so I think this could eliminate a lot of affirmative offense.

  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

what negative K's are there? my friend told me about a biopower one where the link was the gov't is doing stuff with the environment or something. Also, @Umbrella, i would think that affirms. If we are protecting the environment, and extracting long term, it means we are prioritizing the environment at least short term (which affirms).

 

also there is going to be a lot of "neg must defend converse"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

what negative K's are there? my friend told me about a biopower one where the link was the gov't is doing stuff with the environment or something. Also, @Umbrella, i would think that affirms. If we are protecting the environment, and extracting long term, it means we are prioritizing the environment at least short term (which affirms).

 

also there is going to be a lot of "neg must defend converse"

To answer your first question off the top of my head there is green neolib, Deep ecology (probably against more traditional affs), colonialism, orientalism would probably work too, a lot of the stuff from the policy topic this year would work pretty well. 

I think your second question is about parallel burdens, which still exist in front of more traditional judges but most progressive judges don't seem to care about that anymore (at least from what I can gather)  

Edited by ironcross123

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

but parallel burdens will be a large theory issue.

also how is deep ecology a neg K

 

TBH, prep ur neg must debate converse shells, cuz that eliminates almost ALL neg K ground

 

Always be preped to debate parallel burdens because it really is a part of LD at least according to the NFL. 

 

And to answer your second question

Individual accountability is way more important for deep ecology as a movement, so against kritikal affs it could work. But its mostly for traditional affs. Any utilitarian calculus on the aff turns nature into a utility. Like if the aff says helping nature is k2 solving any human impact they are turning nature into utility. And deep ecology just says that is straight up wrong. We need to protect nature, as individuals, because nature has every right to exist. Not because we get something for it. For instance when we have conservation efforts we have to assign values to the natural. We assign those values based on natures usefulness to us as humans.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Obviously you wouldn't read a Deep Eco K against a Deep Eco Aff, the arg is that the K would criticize some aspect of the AC but would not need to support resource extraction, which is where the discussion of parallel burdens comes in.  If the neg doesn't need to defend resource extraction, then you're good.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Obviously you wouldn't read a Deep Eco K against a Deep Eco Aff, the arg is that the K would criticize some aspect of the AC but would not need to support resource extraction, which is where the discussion of parallel burdens comes in.  If the neg doesn't need to defend resource extraction, then you're good.

You might be able to defend some kind of resource extraction even with deep eco. Like some Native American use all that you kill kind of thing

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If anyone wants to trade jan/feb prep, or jan/feb prep for general LD files, hmu.

 

I've done a lot of prep for stuff I won't probably need.  

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...